2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocel.2009.02.021
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic tumors in the liver using microRNA expression

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
0
35
1
Order By: Relevance
“…MicroRNAs were selected based on their expression levels and distributions in the training set (Table 1), with the aim of selecting microRNAs that provide a distinct difference in expression that can be used for accurate classification. 30,37,41 For identifying between the pair of types (chromophobe, oncocytoma) and the pair (conventional, papillary), we chose hsa-miR-221 and hsa-miR-210; for identifying between chromophobe and oncocytoma, we chose hsa-miR-200c and hsa-miR-139-5p; and for identifying between papillary and conventional, we chose hsa-miR-31 and hsa-miR-126 (Figure 3). Using one microRNA from each set is sufficient to obtain a clear separation between the four groups ( Figure 3A), but to provide internal normalization and ensure better performance we used a combination of two microRNAs with complementary specificities at each decision point.…”
Section: ) and Papillary Tumors (N ϭ 20)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MicroRNAs were selected based on their expression levels and distributions in the training set (Table 1), with the aim of selecting microRNAs that provide a distinct difference in expression that can be used for accurate classification. 30,37,41 For identifying between the pair of types (chromophobe, oncocytoma) and the pair (conventional, papillary), we chose hsa-miR-221 and hsa-miR-210; for identifying between chromophobe and oncocytoma, we chose hsa-miR-200c and hsa-miR-139-5p; and for identifying between papillary and conventional, we chose hsa-miR-31 and hsa-miR-126 (Figure 3). Using one microRNA from each set is sufficient to obtain a clear separation between the four groups ( Figure 3A), but to provide internal normalization and ensure better performance we used a combination of two microRNAs with complementary specificities at each decision point.…”
Section: ) and Papillary Tumors (N ϭ 20)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although studies have reported promising treatment strategies for HCC, the poor outcome remains unchanged, with a median survival of most patients of 6-9 months following diagnosis [3]. Currently, molecular profiling of HCC has suggested that a set of genes are deregulated in the development of HCC, and that the expression levels of these genes are correlated with HCC diagnostic classification, prognosis, and biological targeted therapy [4][5][6][7]. Research to identify the deregulated genes in HCC and to elucidate their roles in HCC carcinogenesis and progression is ongoing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One microarray analysis applying to microRNAs was performed to distinguish hepatocellular carcinoma from metastatic tumors in the liver [21]. The study demonstrated that two microRNAs, hsa-miR-141 and hsa-miR-200c had significant higher level in non-hepatic epithelial tumors to promote epithelial phenotypes while endothelial-associated hsa-miR-126 showed higher expression levels in hepatocellular carcinomas in contrast.…”
Section: High-throughput Analysis For Profi-ling Of Cancer Transcriptmentioning
confidence: 98%